Process of producing bio-organo-phosphate (BOP) fertilizer through continuous solubilization of rock phosphate by composting bioprocess and bioaugmentation with phosphorus solubilizing microorganisms

ABSTRACT

A bio-organo-phosphate fertilizer having a consortia of microorganisms including phosphorus solubilizing microorganisms and rock phosphate enriched compost is described. The bio-organo-phosphate fertilizer can also include plant growth regulating microorganisms.

CROSS REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No.13/789,407, filed Mar. 7, 2013, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,932,382, whichclaims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No.61/651,196, filed May 24, 2012, which applications are herebyincorporated by reference in their entirety.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates generally to the field of production ofbio-organo-phosphate (BOP) fertilizer. More particularly, this inventionrelates to the field of isolation, screening and optimization ofconsortia of efficient phosphate solubilizing microorganisms (PSM) andnovel plant growth regulating microorganisms (PGRM), wherein the PSMproduce organic acids and other organic compounds within a compostsubstrate, which thereafter may be bioaugmented with PGRM to facilitatephosphorus (P) bioavailability to plants for better growth.

BACKGROUND

I. The Problem with Sub-Optimal Use of Phosphatic Fertilizers.

Phosphorus (P) is an important nutrient required for plant growth anddevelopment, making up 0.2% of plants on dry weight basis. (Vance, 2001;Sachachtman et al., 1998.) It is a significant part of a plant'sphysiological and biochemical activities, such as photosynthesis, carbonmetabolism, membrane formation, energy generation, nucleic acidsynthesis, glycolysis, respiration, enzyme activation/inactivation andnitrogen fixation. (Bucio et al., 2003.)

Plants absorb most of their phosphorus as the primary orthophosphate ion(H₂PO₄ ⁻) and a smaller amount from the secondary orthophosphate ion(HPO₄ ⁻⁻). Plants also absorb certain soluble organic phosphates (i.e.PO₄ ⁻⁻, nucleic acid and phytic acid). (Sekhar and Aery, 2001; Mullins,2009.)

Amongst a number of advantages, the addition of phosphorus createsdeeper and more abundant plant roots. (Gupta and Sen, 2012.) Conversely,a phosphorus deficiency alters root architecture, which ultimatelyaffects seed development and normal crop maturity. (Williamson et al.,2001.) Thus, the availability of adequate phosphorus is fundamental tostimulate early plant growth and hasten maturity.

However, phosphorus is among the least bio-available nutrients in soil(Takahashi and Anwar, 2007.) While the total amount of phosphorus is0.05% of soil content on average, only 0.1% of that amount is availableto plants. (Zou et al., 1992.) Even in fertile soils, less than 10 μM isavailable at pH 6.5 where it is the most soluble. (Gyaneshwar et al.,1998.)

Soil phosphorus is found in both organic and mineral pools. Twentypercent (20%) to eighty percent (80%) of soil phosphorus is found in anorganic form, such as phytic acid, while the rest of phosphorus is foundas inorganic fraction. (Sachachtman et al., 1998.) Because most arid andsemi-arid soil regimes are deficient in phosphorus, phosphaticfertilizers are required to replenish the phosphorus demanded by cropplants.

However, more than 80% of the phosphorus applied as fertilizer stagnatesin an immobile pool due to the presence of iron (Fe) and aluminum (Al)in acidic soils, and calcium (Ca) in neutral and alkaline soils,resulting in insolubilization, precipitation and adsorption orconversion into an organic form through biological activities. (Harriset al., 2006.) This so called “fixation” of externally suppliedphosphorus is common in arid alkaline and calcareous soils because ofthe higher activity of the calcium. And when coupled with a high pHtypically found in soils, the application of externally suppliedphosphorus favors the precipitation of relatively insoluble di-calciumphosphate and other basic calcium phosphates such as hydroxyl-apatiteand carbonato-apatite decreasing the activity of phosphorus. Researchsuggests that phosphorus “fixation” in alkaline soils is largelyattributed to the retention by clays saturated with calcium. Becausecalcium ions can retain greater amount of phosphorus as those saturatedwith sodium or other mono-violent ions, the formation of clay(Ca⁺⁺—H₂PO₄ ⁻⁻) is believed to be the most likely culprit.

Low availability of phosphorus to crop plants is a worldwide problem andthus crop yield on 30 to 40% of world's arable land is limited byphosphorus availability. (Vance et al., 2003.)

To overcome the consistent deficiency of phosphorus inalkaline/calcareous soils, soluble phosphatic fertilizers are applied toagricultural fields to maximize crop production. (Shenoy and Kalagudi,2005.) Commercial fertilizers have played a very significant role inenhancing the per acre yield of crops and in return feeding the risingpopulation of the world.

Unfortunately, however, current production of phosphorus fertilizers isinsufficient to meet rising demand. The alarming depletion of worldresources of rock phosphate, along with their low use efficiency, hasresulted in consistently increasing prices of phosphorus fertilizers.Elevated fertilizer prices, their scarcity at the right time ofapplication, as well as sub-optimal doses largely accounts for lowphosphorus fertilizers use. (Alam et al., 2005.) In addition to theseproblems, the fixation/precipitation/adsorption/transformation ofphosphorus decreases efficiency of applied chemical phosphorusfertilizers. Such sub-optimal use of phosphate fertilizers has led toexogenous application of substantial quantities of phosphaticfertilizers in agricultural fields. (Vassilev and Vassileva, 2003; Azizet al., 2006.)

Accordingly, improved supply of organic phosphate which not only supplysoluble organic phosphates but also release substantial amount ofphosphorus through microbial mineralization of organically boundphosphorus would be highly desirable.

II. Current Limitations with Production of Fertilizers and InefficientUse.

Rock phosphate (RP) is a basic raw material used for manufacturing ofchemical phosphatic fertilizer. Globally, there are four major types ofphosphate resources in the world, including marine, igneous, metamorphicand biogenic phosphate deposits which contain either of thefluor-apatite (Ca₁₀(PO₄)₆F₂), hydroxy-apatite (Ca₁₀(PO₄)₆(OH)₂),carbonate-hydroxy-apatite (Ca₁₀(PO₄CO₃)₆(OH)₂), francolite, dahllite,and cellophane compounds. (Straaten, 2002.) Reserves are primarily foundin Northern Africa, China, the Middle East, United States, Brazil,Canada, Finland, Russia and South Africa. Large phosphate resources havealso been identified on the continental shelves and on seamounts in theAtlantic and the Pacific Ocean. World rock phosphate reserves are morethan 300 billion tons, while annual consumption in 2011 was 191 millionterns, up 20% from 2010.

The desired grade of rock phosphate for manufacturing classic chemicalfertilizers is one having 30% P₂O₅ or higher, with low silica, magnesiumand other elements. Reserves of these grades are declining. A number ofphysio-chemical processes are employed to improve P₂O₅ content oflow-grade rock phosphate and to remove undesired elements. Physical andthermal up gradation of rock phosphate is achieved through crushing &screening, scrubbing, de-sliming, flotation and magnetic and gravitationseparation. However, a substantial amount of energy is consumed andenvironmental pollutants are released in these processes.

Rock phosphate shows a considerable proportion of isomorphicsubstitution in the crystal lattice and has a variable proportion andamounts of accessory minerals and impurities. Research shows that rockphosphates are appropriate for direct use in acidic soils for the supplyof available phosphorus, but are unsuitable for neutral to alkalinesoils. (Sekhar and Aery, 200 L) Thus, the release of bioavailablephosphorus from insoluble phosphates in alkaline/calcareous soil isimportant for sustainable agriculture by mobilizing its phosphorusthrough a variety of advanced approaches where an inert phosphorussource is predictable, and can be rehabilitated into plant availableform. (Kennedy and Smith, 1995; Caravaca et al., 2004.)

In addition to phosphorus problems, depleted organic matter reserves ofarid alkaline/calcareous soils further decrease crop production, as wellas affect numerous soil metabolic processes. (Mullins, 2009.) Mostorganic matter decomposes quickly when applied in hot arid climate,which explains why arid soils are poor in organic matter. But, organicmatter is a universal remedy and is known to improve soil health andavailability of nutrients to plant. Most organic wastes are a potentialsource of plant macronutrients as well as providing a large quantity ofmicronutrients. However, it is difficult to increase the organic mattercontent of soils that are well aerated, such as in coarse sands andsoils in warm-hot and arid regions, because added materials decomposerapidly. (Hamza and Anderson, 2010.)

Generally, arid climate tends to enhance microbial decomposition oforganic matter, and such soils are low in organic carbon. When anyinoculum or microorganism cells are added to those soils, theirpopulation typically do not reach a level at which they can performefficiently. In many cases, they do not survive long, often resulting ininconsistent performance. This situation alarmingly needs restoration oforganic matter through exogenous application. But unlike chemicalfertilizers, these organic amendments are not that rich in nutrients,particularly in phosphorus. Therefore, after the introduction ofchemical fertilizers and high yielding varieties in cropping system,farmers are largely dependent on continuous injection of chemicalfertilizers to meet high plant nutrient requirements.

But, the use of organic waste and chemical fertilizers not only requiresconstant replenishment (with significant resources to create), but theyare also a source of pollution, requiring additional management forshort term and long term environmental impacts. Organic waste managementis a major environmental issue because constant population growth meanscommensurately more waste to be recycled. Likewise, chemical fertilizermanufacturing is known to generate a wide range of air emissions,hazardous materials, effluents, waste water, and other harmfulbyproducts are generated (e.g. hydrofluoric acid, silicon,tetrafluoride, fluoride, SO₄phospho-gypsum, NH₄, NO_(x) fluoride air,P₂O₅ effluents, dust fluoride effluents, chloride, cadmium, lead,radionuclides and sulfur compounds, etc.). Further, chemical fertilizermanufacturing also consumes substantial energy, ranging from 120 to 450KWh per ton of P₂O₅, depending on the process employed. Moreover,chemical fertilizer manufacturing consumes substantial amounts of water,ranging from 2 to 150 cubic meters per ton of P₂O₅, depending on theprocess employed. (UNEP Technical report, 1996; World Bank Group report,2007.)

As the worldwide population grows, and the need for agricultural farmingusing organic waste and chemical fertilizers increase, recycling organicwastes is quickly becoming a major environmental issue. Compostingorganic residues is believed to be the best possible means to recycle.Using composted products improves soil properties, and in turn improvessoil productivity, thus promoting the plant growth. (Vassilev andVassileva, 2003.)

Thus, the efficient use of organic fertilizers is a key strategy notonly for improving soil organic matter content and nutrients supply butalso for reducing the input cost of mineral fertilizers and promotinghealthier environment. (Bhattacharyya et al., 2007; Ahmad et al.,2007a.)

Organic approaches that partially supplement nutrients through organicsources (and which do not involve synthetic formulation) have gainedconsiderable positive response during recent years. However, under thecurrent hegemony of organic fertilizer practitioners, and because ofaccelerated decomposition, the use of organic materials remain poor innutrient contents and do not completely fulfill nutritional needs ofcrops, particularly of phosphorus, for normal growth and yields. (Ahmadet al., 2007b.)

However, lab research suggests that organic fertilizers can be used asrich carriers of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria that not onlymobilize nutrients in soils but also facilitate nutrient uptake of lessmobile nutrients, such as phosphorus, by altering root architecture.These synergistic effects benefit crops tremendously. (Shahroona et al.,2008.) And novel plant growth promoting rihizobacteria (PGPR) isolatesshow promising attributes when developed and used as bio-fertilizers toenhance soil fertility and promote plant growth. (Dastgeer, 2010.)

However, a consistently lacking element in the use of PGPR isolates isthe ability to consistently deliver the “right type” of bacteria thatplays the appropriate role in phosphorus nutrition. Unless oneconsistently delivers the “right type” of bacteria thatsolubilize/mineralize inorganic and organic soils, such delivery cannotenhance phosphorus availability to plants. (Ahmad et al., 2009; Walpolaand Yoon, 2012.)

Based in part on the hegemony of current organic fertilizer users, andbased on sparse research available on cultivating PGPR isolates, letalone those that are augmented with phosphate solubilizingmicroorganisms (PSM) or plant growth regulating microorganisms (PGRM)including, but not restricted to, prokaryotes such as algae, bacteria,protozoa etc., and eukaryotes such as fungi, etc.; there exists a voidin the industry as to the large scale production of bio-organo-phosphate(BOP) fertilizer using these technologies to produce wide range oforganic P grades suiting crop, soil and environmental conditions.

Accordingly, improved efficacy due to less probability of fixation,precipitation or insolubilization than current commercial solublechemical/inorganic fertilizers is desired. In addition, theenvironmentally conscious production, application, and management oforganic fertilizers are likewise desirable. In sum, there exists along-felt industry need for the large-scale production ofbio-organo-phosphate (BOP) fertilizer of a wide range of organic Pgrades that consistently and optimally delivers phosphorus to plants tohelp improve root architecture, enhance nutrient uptake, acceleratehealthy growth and hasten maturity.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

To improve upon existing methods and processes, the preferredembodiments of the present invention make the phosphorus of rockphosphate mobilized into plant available forms, while providing aseveral improvements over the existing art:

First, the preferred embodiment of the present invention allows one toformulate an excellent phosphorus-enriched product for organicagriculture with no synthetic process involved.

Second, being an organic phosphate, the phosphorus present in productdeveloped through the preferred embodiment of the present invention willnot readily enter into immobile pool of soil. The organically boundphosphorus is released slowly and gradually upon mineralization andsteadily taken up by plant. Thus, the preferred embodiment of thepresent invention will ensure stable and consistent supply of phosphorusfor plant uptake. In other words, the preferred embodiment of thepresent invention will give substantial supply of organic phosphatewhich can not only supply soluble organic phosphates but also releasesubstantial amount of phosphorus through microbial mineralization oforganically bound phosphorus.

Third, the preferred embodiment of the present invention willintroduce/promote integrated nutrient management through regular supplyof nutrients from decomposing organic matter enriched with rockphosphate and augmented with PSM and PGRM. This will improve soil healthand plant roots architecture in addition to nutrient supplements versusclassical chemical fertilizer supplying nutrients only.

Fourth, the preferred embodiment of the present invention will use alltypes of rock phosphate available across the globe to produce highquality organic phosphate. Current chemical production processes cannotutilize rock phosphate rich in impurities (such as ferrous, silica,magnesium, etc.), without first undergoing a beneficiation process,which in turn results in significantly higher production cost andrelease of pollutants to the environment. Thus, one of the benefits ofthe preferred embodiment of the present invention is to use moreefficiently and effectively all grades of rock phosphate withsignificant reduction in energy consumption, water use, and largelyeliminate release of environmental pollutants.

Fifth, the continuous use of the product produced by the preferredembodiment, will develop soil environment conducive for mobilizing othernutrients for better uptake by plants leading to enhanced soilproductivity.

Finally, organic phosphate produced by the preferred embodiment of thepresent invention has better use efficacy due to less probability offixation, precipitation or insolubilization of added P; and its betterutilization by plants due to improved root architecture than thatobserved in case of current commercial soluble chemical/inorganicfertilizers. This will help to reduce ever increasing per hectare use ofphosphatic fertilizers.

One preferred method and process to produce bio-organo-phosphate (BOP)fertilizer includes isolation and selection of microorganisms 100(including PSM and novel PGRM), engaging in biocomposting andbioaugmentation with PSM and PGRM 200, and finally production ofbio-organo-phosphate (BOP) fertilizer 300. As described below, thepreferred method of isolation and selection of efficient PSM and novelPGRM 110 can further include optimizing phosphate solubilization by PSMbased on a qualitative analysis 120 and/or quantitative analysis 130.Alternately, or in addition to the aforementioned step, the preferredmethod of isolation and selection of efficient PSM and novel PGRM 110can further include 1-amino-cyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC)deaminase activity (ACCDA) by PGRM based on qualitative analysis 125 andα-ketobutyrate production by PGRM based on a quantitative analysis 135.Moreover, and as described below, the preferred method of commercialproduction of separate inocula containing PSM and PGRM 150 can furtherinclude identifying the specific ingredients and processes for F1breeding 160, identifying the specific ingredients and processes forcommercial production 170. Further, and as described below, thepreferred method can also include controlling for various factors in thebiocomposting and bioaugmentation processes 200. Other variations,features, and aspects of the system and method of the preferredembodiment are described in detail below with reference to the appendeddrawings.

Other methods, features and advantages of the invention will be or willbecome apparent to one with skill in the art upon examination of thefollowing figures and detailed description. It is intended that all suchadditional systems, methods, features and advantages be included withinthis description, be within the scope of the invention, and be protectedby the accompanying claims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

In order to better appreciate how the above-recited and other advantagesand objects of the inventions are obtained, a more particulardescription of the embodiments briefly described above will be renderedby reference to specific embodiments thereof, which are illustrated inthe accompanying drawings. It should be noted that the components in thefigures are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed uponillustrating the principles of the invention. Moreover, in the figures,like reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout thedifferent views. However, like parts do not always have like referencenumerals. Moreover, all illustrations are intended to convey concepts,where relative sizes, shapes and other detailed attributes may beillustrated schematically rather than literally or precisely.

FIG. 1 is a diagram of a method and process to produce BOP fertilizerthrough continuous solubilization of rock phosphate by compostingbioprocess and bioaugmentation with consortia of PSM and PGRM.

FIG. 2 depicts an overall flowchart illustrating an exemplary embodimentof a process by which isolation and selection of efficient PSM and novelPGRM is accomplished.

FIG. 3 depicts a chart identifying the proper ratios and method formedia 1 for 100 mL F1 breeding of PSM and PGRM.

FIG. 4 depicts a chart identifying the proper ratios and method forproduction of media for commercial production of PSM and PGRM.

FIG. 5 depicts a chart of the factors that are preferably controlledduring the composting process.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The following description of the preferred embodiments of the inventionis not intended to limit the invention to these preferred embodiments,but rather to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use thisinvention. Although any methods, materials, and devices similar orequivalent to those described herein can be used in the practice ortesting of embodiments, the preferred methods, materials, and devicesare now described.

The preferred embodiment of the present invention relates to improvedmethods and processes to produce BOP fertilizer through continuoussolubilization of rock phosphate by a composting bioprocess andbioaugmentation with phosphorus solubilizing microorganisms.

It must be noted that the present invention will function either byusing PSM (alone), or by using the combination of PSM and PGRM, asdescribed infra. However, the preferred method and process of thepresent invention comprises the use of both PSM and PGRM, which isfurther described below. Notwithstanding, the same invention may bepracticed by following the steps below, and omitting the steps involvingPGRM.

As shown in FIG. 1, a preferred method and process 10 to produce BOPfertilizer through rock phosphate solubilization in accordance with apreferred embodiment can generally include isolation and selection ofmicroorganisms 100 (including PSM at a minimum, or preferably thecombination of PSM and PGRM), biocomposting and bioaugmentation with PSMand PGRM 200, and finally the production of BOP fertilizer 300.

As shown in FIG. 2, the isolation and selection of microorganisms 100may be accomplished through two intermediary steps: (1) isolation andselection of efficient PSM and novel PGRM 110; and (2) commercialproduction of separate inocula containing PSM and PGRM 150.

As to the first intermediary step (isolation and selection of efficientPSM and novel PGRM 110), rhizosphere soil is collected from crop fields.Crop plants are uprooted at different growth stages and brought to thelaboratory in pre-sterilized polythene bags. Non-rhizosphere soil isremoved by agitating the roots strongly. Soil strictly adhering to theroots is removed and used for isolation. Rhizomicrobes are then isolatedby employing a serial dilution plate technique (as exemplified inZuberer, 1994; see also Semedo et al., 2001; Shahzad et al., 2010) usingrock phosphate enriched media (PEM) for PSM and ACC enriched media(ACCEM) for PGRM, separately. Colonies exhibiting prolific growth areselected for further streaking on fresh plates of respective medium.Further purification and multiplication of microbial isolates areperformed by streaking fresh plates using PEM and ACCEM medium,respectively. The isolated PSM are then examined for P-solubilizingpotentials and PGRM for ACC deaminase activity (ACCDA). Forty (40) mL ofthe sterilized respective broth containing RP and ACC are added to twoautoclaved test tubes separately. The media are then inoculated with thePSM and PGRM, respectively, of uniform cell density and incubatedbetween 25° C. to 35° C. An un-inoculated tube is used as a control. ThePSM showing maximum phosphate solubilizing and PGRM showing maximumACCDA are selected for further studies. Culturing conditions formaximized growth of PSM and P-solubilizing activity, and PGRM and ACCDAare thereafter optimized (as described infra). The optimal conditionsfor PSM and PGRM growth generally are between 25° C. to 38° C. at a pHclose to neutral, with an incubation period of fifty to ninety six hoursunder shaking conditions.

As further shown in FIG. 2, in the preferred method and process, thephosphate solubilizing capability of PSM are observed based on aqualitative analysis 120 and quantitative analysis 130. In addition,ACCDA of the PGRM isolates are observed based on a qualitative analysis125 as well as α-ketobutyrate production for quantitative analysis 135.

Optimizing the potential of PSM to solubilize rock phosphate based on aqualitative analysis 120 is performed by using the following preferredmethod and process: An agar medium is prepared wherein rock phosphate isthe sole phosphorus source. PSM are tested by using halo zone formation.PSM are first cultured in broth for three to five days. Thereafter, afull loop containing culture is placed on each plate while incubating at25° C. to 38° C. for six to ten days. Toothpicks are used for sampling.The formation of halo zones after fifty to ninety six hours ofincubation indicates the PSM's ability to solubilize inorganicphosphorus. The experiment is performed three times to ensure consistentreplication.

Optimizing the potential of PSM to solubilize inorganic phosphorous onthe basis of quantitative analysis 130 is performed by using thefollowing preferred method and process: A mathematical analysis of thesolubilizing activity of PSM is determined by the methods described byNautiyal (1999). Rock phosphate is used as insoluble inorganic form ofphosphate in a broth medium. Quantitative estimations are based onmeasured performance of phosphate solubilization in broth cultureinoculated with selected PSM in triplicate. An autoclaved un-inoculatedmedium should also be run as a control. Flasks of bacterial strains areincubated for two to four days at 25° C. to 38° C. in an orbital shakingincubator. Cultures are thereafter harvested by centrifugation at 8,000to 10,000 rpm. A phosphate containing culture supernatant is estimatedusing the protocol described by Ryan et al. (2001).

Optimizing the potential of PGRM to generate ACCDA based on aqualitative analysis 125 is performed by using the following preferredmethod and process: DF minimal medium is prepared as per protocoldescribed by Dworkin and Foster (1958) supplemented with ACC as the solesource of nitrogen. (Penrose and Glick 2003.) Solid DF minimal mediumcontaining ACC is inoculated with a loop of starter culture (grownovernight in LB broth at 24° C. to 30° C. in an orbital shakingincubator). Plates are incubated at 24° C. to 30° C. in darkness. When acolony emerges within two to four days, that event indicates theexistence of ACCDA.

Optimizing the potential of PGRM to generate ACCDA based on aquantitative analysis 135 is performed by suing the following preferredmethod and process: Quantitative determination of ACCDA of PGRM is doneby measuring production of α-ketobutyrate from ACC. PGRM should betested for ACCDA are incubated for twenty to thirty hours in DF minimalmedium containing ACC in orbital shaking incubator. Then centrifuge theculture at 8,000 to 10,000 thousand rpm and the microbial pellet isobtained. The production of α-ketobutyrate is measured by using thereagent 2,4-dintrophenylehydrazine by following the protocol describedby Penrose and Glick (2003).

Referring back to FIG. 2, the second step is the commercial productionof separate inocula containing PSM and PGRM 150, which is accomplishedby separately growing PSM and PGRM in two different steps using the samegrowth medium in two different containers. First, F1 breeding 100 mL ofmedium 1, 160 occurs. Thereafter the same inocula of PSM and PGRM areprepared separately using media in two different containers forcommercial production 170. In other words, the basic breeding media iscultivated, then in a second step commercial media is used for largescale biomass production of PSM and PGRM, separately—(see tables inFIGS. 3 and 4). Finally the media for commercial production 170, one forPSM and the other for PGRM, should contain several billion bacteriacolonies per milliliter in order to keep the respective inoculum viablefor culturing, storage and field application.

As shown in FIG. 3, the F1 breeding for 100 mL of medium 1, 160 isprepared in two different containers for PSM and PGRM, separately, usingmannitol, KH₂PO₄, yeast extract, and MgSO₄ maintaining pH levels of 6.0to 7.5. The entire mixture is then autoclaved. Thereafter, the selectedstrains of PSM and PGRM are mixed, in their respective containers, whentemperature drops. The flasks are incubated between 25° C. and 35° C. bycontinuous shaking on an orbital shaker. The desired population of PSMand PGRM is achieved within fifty to ninety six hours that can bechecked periodically by using a UV-visible spectrophotometer.

As shown in FIG. 4, the media for commercial production 170 is preparedin two different containers for PSM and PGRM, separately, using H₂O,trypton, calcium pantothinate, yeast extract, vitamin B1, KH₂PO₄, andvitamin B12 while maintaining pH levels of 6.0 to 7.5. The pH should beadjusted to the target range by either by adding a few drops of H₂SO₄ orNaOH. The entire mixture is then autoclaved. Thereafter, the selectedstrains of PSM and PGRM are mixed in their respective containers whentemperature drops. The flasks are incubated between 25° C. and 35° C.under shaking conditions by using continuous aeration. The desiredpopulation is achieved within fifty to ninety six hours that can bechecked time to time by using UV-visible spectrophotometer.

Referring back to FIG. 1, the second major method and process isbicomposting and bioaugmentation with PSM and PGRM. Organic wastematerial is collected and sorted out to remove unwanted substances. Thestored organic material is air dried to bring the moisture level below30%. Dried organic matter along with rock phosphate is transferred intoa composting unit. Readily available C-source (at 2% to 4%) is addedduring the composting to accelerate the bioprocess in a composter withan adjustable min⁻¹. Bioaugmentation with PSM and PGRM, separately, isthen performed at later stages when the temperature falls to a levelrequired to support mesophilic growth.

Referring to FIG. 5, there are six factors that must be optimized duringthe composting bioprocess 200 in light of variables such as soil types,organic matter, and climate considerations. Namely: (1) rock-phosphateto compost ratio (RP:compost ratio) 210; (2) incubation period 220; (3)temperature 230; (4) moisture 240; (5) N-source 250; and (6) C-source260. Each is discussed, in turn:

Rock phosphate to compost ratio 210: In order to optimize the RP:compostratio, different ratios should be used and analyzed during composting totest for maximum release of phosphorus from rock phosphate enrichedcompost (RP-EC) upon spiking in soil. It has been generally observedthat ratios between 45:100 (RP:EC) and 60:100 (RP:EC) release the mostphosphorus when spiked in soil.

Incubation period 220: Incubation time for optimum solubility of RP inRP-EC is determined by using different samples collected at differentincubation times during the composting process. The release of P shouldbe measured by spiking in soil with RP-EC. It has been generallyobserved that maximum phosphorus is released between nine to fourteendays of incubation.

Temperature 230: Simultaneously while controlling the incubation period220, the suitable RP-compost mixture should also be evaluated atdifferent temperature levels. Data should be collected weekly from RP-ECspiked soil to test for efficient release of phosphorus. It has beengenerally observed that maximum phosphorus is released when temperaturesare controlled between 30° C. and 40° C.

Moisture 240: The suitable RP-compost mixture should likewise beevaluated at different moisture levels. Data should be collected weeklyfrom RP-EC spiked soil to test for efficient release of phosphorus. Ithas generally been observed that maximum phosphorus is released whenmoisture is controlled between 10%, and 15%.

N-source 250: Trypton is a preferred N-source. For determining the bestconcentration of N-source to accelerate multiplication of microflora foraccelerated solubilization of RP-P, different N levels should be tested.Data should be collected weekly from RP-EC spiked soil for efficientrelease of phosphorus. It has generally been observed that maximumphosphorus is released when N-source concentrations are controlledbetween 1% and 2% when spiked in soil.

C-source 260: High grade saccharose is a preferred carbon source.C-source concentration for optimum solubility of RP in RP-EC duringcomposting bioprocess should be determined by adding different levels ofC-source upon onset of composting. The release of phosphorus should bemeasured in soil spiked with RP-EC. It is commonly observed that maximumphosphorus is released when C-source concentration is controlled between2% to 4%.

In the alternative, for formulation with manures, RP at desiredconcentration is blended and mixed with organic matter in the compostingunit while controlling the RP:compost ratio, incubation period,temperature, moisture, N-source, and C-source. During this process,organic acids are released from decomposing organic matter that helpsolubilization of RP. The decomposition of organic material isdetermined by measuring C:P ratio. The resultant product would be richin phosphorus as indicated by C:P ratio and mineralization potential inspiked soil.

Referring back to FIG. 1, the final major method and process is theproduction of bio-organo-phosphate (BOP) fertilizer 300. During thecomposting process of RP-EC, inocula of PSM and PGRM are added atdifferent stages at the population level of several billion upon theonset of mesophilic phase (≦25° C. to 35° C.) for better survival andmultiplication. A finished product in the form of BOP fertilizer occursin two to four days of incubation.

A series of laboratory incubation trials should be conducted before andafter spiking soil with BOP fertilizer to determine plant-availablephosphorus content in native soil, ACCDA, and phosphorus content (P₂O₅)of formulated BOP fertilizer. Temperature should be controlled between18° C. and 25° C. when conducting trials. As a benchmark, theeffectiveness of the BOP fertilizer should be compared with commercialphosphatic fertilizer by using a variety of crops and vegetables, andusing a multiplicity of field trials.

The preceding described embodiments of the invention are provided asillustrations and descriptions. They are not intended to limit theinvention to precise form described. In particular, it is contemplatedthat functional implementation of invention described herein may beimplemented equivalently in functional components, ingredients,processes or building blocks. Other variations and embodiments arepossible in light of above teachings, and it is thus intended that thescope of invention not be limited by this Detailed Description, butrather by Claims following.

REFERENCES Other Publications

The following documents are hereby incorporated by reference in theirentirety:

-   Ahmad, R., S. M. Shahzad, A. Khalid, M. Arshad and M. H. Mahmood.    2007a. Growth and yield response of wheat (Triticumaestivunt L.) and    Maize (Zea mays L.) to nitrogen and L. Tryptophan enriched compost.    Pak. J. Bot 39: 541-549.-   Ahmad R., G. Jilani, M. Arshad, Z. A. Zahir and A. Khalid. 2007b.    Bio-conversion of organic waste for their recycling in agriculture    and overview of perspective and prospects. Annals of Microbiology,    57(4): 471-479.-   Ahmad A. K., G. Jilani, M. S. Akhtar, S. M. S. Naqvi and M.    Rasheed. 2009. Phosphorus Solubilizing Bacteria Occurrence,    Mechanisms and their Role in Crop Production. J. Agric. Biol. Cci. 1    (1): 48-58.-   Alam, S. M, S. M. Shah and M. M. Iqbal. 2005. Evaluation of method    and time of fertilizer application for yield and optimum    P-efficiency in wheat. Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 27: 457-463.-   Aziz, T., Rahmatullah, M. A. Maqsood, M. A. Tahir, I. Ahmad    and M. A. Cheema. 2006. Phosphorus utilization by six brassica    cultivars (Brassica juncea L.) from tri-calcium phosphate; a    relatively insoluble P compound. Pakistan journal of botany 38(5):    1529-1538.-   Bhattacharyya, P., K. Chakrabarti, A. Chakraborty, D. C. Nayak, S.    Tripathy and M. A. Powell. 2007. Municipal waste compost as an    alternative to cattle manure for supplying potassium to lowland    rice. Chemosphere. 66: 1789-1793.-   Bojinova, D., R. Velkova and R. Ivanova. 2008. Solubilization of    Morocophosphorite by Aspergillusniger. J. Bioresource TechnoL 99:    7348-7353.-   Bucio, J. L., A. C. Ramirez and L. H. Estrella. 2003. The role of    nutrient availability in regulating root architecture. Current    Opinion in Plant Biology, 6: 280-287.-   Caravaca, F., M. M. Alguacil, R. Azcon, G. Diaz and A. Roldan. 2004.    Comparing the effectiveness of mycorrhizal inoculum and amendment    with sugar beet, rock phosphate and Aspergillusniger to enhance    field performance of the leguminous shrub Dorycniumpentaphyllum L.    Appl. Soil Ecol., 25: 169-180.-   Dastager, S. G., C. K. Deepa and A. Pandey. 2010. Isolation and    characterization of novel plant growth promoting micrococcus sp    NII-0909 and its interaction with cowpea. Plant Physiol. Biochem.,    48(12): 987-992.-   Dworkin M. and J. Foster. 1958. Experiments with some microorganisms    which utilize ethane and hydrogen. J Bacteril 7 5: 592-601.-   Gupta, A. and S. Sen. 2012. Role of biofertlizers and biopesticides    for sustainable agriculture. Department of Biotechnology, Singhania    University, Rajasthan.-   Gyaneshwar, P., G. N. Kumar and L J. Parkh. 1998. Effect of    buffering on the phosphate solubilizing ability of microorganisms.    World J. Microbial. Biotechnol. 14: 669-673.-   Hamza, M. A. and W. K. Anderson. 2010. Potential and limitations of    soil organic matter build-up in dry areas. African Journal of    Agricultural Research Vol. 5(20), pp. 2850-2861, 18 Oct. 2010.-   Harris, J. N., P. B. New and P. M. Martin. 2006. Laboratory tests    can predict beneficial effects of phosphate-solubilizing bacteria on    plants. J. Soil Biol. & Bioch. 38: 1521-1526.-   Khan, M. S. and A. Zaidi. 2007. Synergistic effects of the    inoculation with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and    arbuscularmycrrhizal fungus on the performance of wheat Turkish J.    Agric forest 31: 355-362.-   Kennedy, A. C. and K. L. Smith, 1995. Soil microbial diversity and    the sustainability of agriculture soils. Plant Soil. 170: 75-86.-   Mahdi S. S., G. I. Hassan, S. A. Samoon, H. A. Rather, S. A. Dar    and B. Zehra. 2010. Bio fertilizers in organic agriculture. Journal    of Phytology, 2(10): 42-54.-   Mullins, G. 2009. Phosphorus, agriculture and the environment.    Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Publication    424-029.-   Nautiyal, C. S. 1999. An efficient microbiological growth medium for    screening phosphate solubilizing microorganisms. FEMS MicrobioL    Lett. 170: 265-270.-   Penrose D. M. and B. R. Glick. 2003. Methods for isolating and    characterizing ACC deaminase-containing plant growth-promoting    rhizobacteria. Physiol Plant 118: 10-15.-   Rizwan A., M. Arshad, A. Khalid and Z. A. Zaheer. 2008.    Effectiveness of organic/bio-fertilizer supplemented with chemical    fertilizers for improving soil\water retention, aggregate stability,    growth and nutrient uptake of maize (Zea mays L.). Journal of    Sustainable Agriculture, 31:4, 57-77.-   Rodriguez, H. and R. Fraga. 1999. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria    and their role in plant growth promotion. J. Biotech. Adv. 17:    319-339.-   Ryan, J., G. Estefan and A. Rashid. 2001. Soil and Plant Analysis:    Laboratory Manual. ICARDA, Aleppo.-   Sachachtman, D. P., R. J. Rield and S. M. Ayling. 1998. Phosphorus    uptake by plants from soil to cell. Plant physiology 116: 447-453.-   Sekhar, D. M. R. and N. C. Aery. 2001. Phosphate rock with farmyard    manure as P fertilizer in neutral and weakly alkaline soils. CURRENT    SCIENCE. 80; 9-10.-   Semedo, L T. A. S., A. A. Linhares, R. C. Gomes, G. P. Manfio, C. S.    Alviano, L. F. Linares and R. R. R. Coelho. 2001. Isolation and    characterization of actinomycetes from Brazilian tropical soils.    Microbiol. Res. 155: 291-299.-   Shahroona B., M. Naveed, M. Arshad and Z. A. Zahir. 2008.    Fertilizer-dependent efficiency of Pseudomonads for improving    growth, yield and nutrient use efficiency of wheat (Triticum    aestivum L.). Appl Microbiol. Biotechnol 79: 147-155.-   Shahzad, S. M., A. Khalid, M. Arshad and K. Rehman. 2010. Screening    rhizobacteria containing ACC-deaminase for growth promotion of    chickpea seedlings under axenic conditions. Soil & Environ. 29(1):    38-46.-   Shenoy, V., V. G. M. Kalagudi. 2005. Enhancing plant phosphorus use    efficiency for sustainable cropping. J. Biotechnol. Adv. 23:    501-513.-   Straaten, P. V. 2002. Rocks for Crops: Agrominerals of sub-Saharan    Africa. ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya, 338 pp.-   Takahashi, S. and M. Anwar. 2007. Wheat grain yield, phosphorus    uptake and soil phosphorus fraction after 23 years of annual    fertilizer application to an Andosol. J. Field Crops Res. 101:    160-171.-   United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 1996. Mineral Fertilizer    Production and the Environment. Technical Report part 1.-   Vance, C. P. 2001. Symbiotic nitrogen fixation and phosphorus    acquisition: plant nutrition in a world of declining renewable    resources. J. Plant Physiol. 127: 390-397.-   Vance, C. P., C. Uhde-Stone and D. L. Allan. 2003. Phosphorus    Acquisition and use: Critical adaptations by plants for securing a    nonrenewable resources. New Phytol. 157: 423-447.-   Vassilev, N and M Vassileva. 2003. Biotechnological solubilization    of rock phosphate on media containing agro-industrial wastes. Appl    Microbiol Biotechnol. 61: 435-440.-   Walpola, B. C. and M. H. Yoon. 2012. Prospectus of phosphate    solubilizing microorganisms and phosphorus availability in    agricultural soils. African Journal of Microbiology Research Vol.    6(37), pp. 6600-6605.-   Williamson, L. C., S. P. C. P. Ribrioux, A. H. Fitter and H. M. O.    Leyser. 2001. Phosphate Availability Regulates Root System    Architecture in Arabidopsis. J. Plant Physiol. 126: 875-882.-   World Bank Group Report 2007. Environmental, health, and safety    guidelines for Phosphate Fertilizer Manufacturing.-   Zou, X., D. Binkley and K. Doxtader. 1992. A new method fix    estimating gross phosphorus mineralization and immobilization rates    in soils. J. Plant Soil. 52: 147-152.-   Zuberer, D. 1994. Recovery and Enumeration of Viable Bacteria. 8:    119-144.

What is claimed is:
 1. A bio-organo-phosphate (BOP) fertilizercomprising: a consortia of microorganisms including phosphorussolubilizing microorganisms (PSM) and plant growth regulatingmicroorganisms (PGRM); and a rock phosphorous enriched compost; wherein:the PSM have an optimal growth temperature between 25° C. and 38° C.,and the PSM and PGRM are different microorganisms.
 2. The BOP fertilizerof claim 1 wherein the PSM is isolated from crop field rhizosphere soil.3. The BOP fertilizer of claim 1, wherein at least one of the PSM andPGRM is isolated from crop field rhizosphere soil.
 4. The BOP fertilizerof claim 1, wherein the PSM is selected from the group consisting ofcolonies of PSM exhibiting prolific growth in a phosphate enrichedmedium.
 5. The BOP fertilizer of claim 1, wherein the PSM is selectedfrom the group consisting of colonies of PSM showing maximum phosphatesolubilizing potential in a phosphate enriched medium.
 6. The BOPfertilizer of claim 5, wherein the sole source of phosphorus is rockphosphate.
 7. The BOP fertilizer of claim 1, wherein the PGRM isselected from the group consisting of colonies of PGRM exhibitingprolific growth in a 1-amino-cyclopropane-carboxylic acid enrichedmedium.
 8. The BOP fertilizer of claim 1, wherein the PGRM is selectedfrom the group consisting of colonies of PGRM showing maximum1-amino-yclopropane-carboxylic acid deaminase activity in a1-amino-cyclopropane-carboxylic acid enriched medium.
 9. The BOPfertilizer of claim 8 wherein, the sole source of nitrogen is1-amino-cyclopropane-carboxylic acid.
 10. The BOP fertilizer of claim 1wherein: the consortia of PSM and PGRM are produced in two separatemedia; each medium is an F1 medium to breed one of the PSM and PGRM; andan F1 inocula of each F1 medium is used to produce the PSM and PGRM.